Unbelievably John Kerry

Once again, John Kerry’s created an unbelievably big problem out of one little phrase.

Throughout his career, Kerry’s had a problem with words. Monday, with just two of them, he managed to illustrate the Obama administration’s overall ambivalence toward a Syria strike, the latest shift in arguments from a man whose case for action has been changing almost with the days of the week.

Text Size

-

+

reset

Kerry: 'Unbelievably small' effort

Obama's Syria interview blitz

Saying that any Syria action would be “unbelievably small” was supposed to reassure voters that the White House isn’t hatching a new Iraq-level invasion and occupation. Instead, he just bolstered skeptics who believe the administration’s either only looking for a symbolic move against Syrian President Bashar Assad to be able to claim action or for those who believe that President Barack Obama’s about to blunder into a long-term engagement in yet another fractured Arab nation.

That’s distinct from the new international policy Kerry at first seemed to have stumbled into, but as subsequent comments from White House officials and the president showed through the day, was actually a concerted — but heavily conditional — float, that Assad could stop an attack if the Syrian president somehow turned over his entire chemical weapons arsenal immediately.

Russia seemed to be hurriedly embracing that proposal, leading to suspicion that Russian President Vladimir Putin had simply seized upon the opportunity for a delay. But in his television interviews Monday evening, Obama embraced Kerry’s suggestion, saying that he’d discussed some of what Russia announced directly with Putin at last week’s G-20 summit. And Obama agreed, he’d “absolutely” put the strike on hold if Assad met the incredibly steep condition of turning over all chemical weapons.

Kerry made clear to his Russian counterpart Monday morning in a prescheduled call that the idea was a rhetorical response, and not a proposal, according to a State Department official, and that the Obama administration was only interested in a serious proposal from Moscow.

He added that the United States wasn’t inclined to trust Assad, given the history with him, the official added, who attributed the speed with which Russia is moving to the administration’s clear position internationally that this proposal would not in any way delay the push in Congress.

To the administration, that was all part of what made Kerry’s Monday a success, rather than a muddle. He broached what’s quickly becoming a major element of the administration’s case on Syria during a quick trip to Europe that racked up more of the international support for the U.S. plan.

Then, after he landed back in Washington, pressed the case again to a closed Hill briefing, where backers say he’s arguably been the administration’s most convincing lobbyist as he’s presented classified evidence. The “unbelievably small” comment didn’t come up in that briefing, and the thought so far is that those words didn’t change any opinions in Congress — those most concerned with by it weren’t going to vote for authorizing a strike anyway.

He’ll be back on the Hill Tuesday, pressing the case to the House Armed Services Committee, then leading a Google Hangout.

Back in 2008, Obama campaign aides would sometimes hold Kerry up as the example of the kind of messaging tangles their candidate needed to avoid. Five years later, the administration was forced to spend what should have been full focus on the closing argument into cleaning up and explaining the latest Kerry bungle.

Monday, the administration had the woman who used to have Kerry’s job — Hillary Clinton — and the woman whom Obama wanted to have his job — National Security Adviser Susan Rice — to make the case while Kerry was in Europe. They, along with the president himself and deputy national security advisers Tony Blinken and Ben Rhodes were part of an effort that Kerry’s said to support of having as many people out in addition to him, even as the administration continues to lean on him to lead the push where on the Hill.

So to Kerry supporters, the “unbelievably small” comment was at most the latest example of a man whose word bungles get the attention instead of the work he’s trying to do.

Rice’s role is particularly striking. She is, after all, the woman who was so toxic to Republicans on the Hill that Obama had to retreat from making her secretary of state, all because the last time she went out and talked about a video, she was accused of facilitating the Benghazi coverup. But hours after Kerry’s off-the-cuff bungle, she was standing at a podium at the New America Foundation, urging the undecided to look at videos the administration’s put out of in the aftermath of the gas attacks, and carefully outlining, “What do we mean by limited?” “What do we mean by deterring?”